Opinions
On this page, you can search and view the Supreme Court’s opinions. If you wish to review the docket or documents filed in a matter, please go to the Court’s public portal search page.
6101 - 6200 of 12418 results
|
State v. Moore
2002 ND 91 Highlight: The defendant's convictions for theft of property, fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer, and reckless driving are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
Interest of T.J.R. (NOTE: case was consol. w/20010286)
2002 ND 90 Highlight: Termination of parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Moore
2002 ND 89 Highlight: Conviction for theft of property is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3), (4). |
|
Bettenhausen v. Bettenhausen
2002 ND 88 Highlight: The trial court's judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Looney v. Looney
2002 ND 87 Highlight: A judgment enforcing an earlier divorce judgment between the parties is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
|
Matrix v. TAG Investments (Cross ref. See Docket Memo)
2002 ND 86 Highlight: As part of the enforcement of a judgment for specific performance of the conveyance of land, a purchaser may proceed by ancillary motion after the trial court has ordered the transfer of the land under N.D.R.Civ.P. 70 to recover costs, attorney fees, and damages for the seller's delay in conveying land. |
|
Shiek v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau, et al.
2002 ND 85 Highlight: When a claimant receives a prior and a subsequent permanent impairment award, the overall number of weeks the claimant is entitled to receive for both the prior and subsequent impairments is the number of weeks that corresponds to the combined value of the prior and subsequent impairments on a whole body basis. |
|
Knoll v. ND Dept. of Transportation
2002 ND 84
Highlight: If a person intentionally or unintentionally provides false information to an operator attempting to follow the State Toxicologist's approved methods for a chemical test, the person cannot challenge the foundation for admissibility of the test results on the ground that the false information resulted in the approved methods not being followed. |
|
Cass Co. Joint Water Resource District v. 1.43 Acres of Land, et al.
2002 ND 83
Highlight: A condemnation action is purely in rem, and does not require acquisition of in personam jurisdiction over the owners of the land. |
|
Estate of Hass
2002 ND 82
Highlight: The trial court's decision whether to remove a personal representative for cause will not be set aside on appeal absent an abuse of discretion. |
|
Uren v. Dakota Dust-Tex, Inc.
2002 ND 81
Highlight: Absent an express agreement to the contrary, a tenant is an implied co-insured under the landlord's property insurance policy, and the insurer may not seek subrogation against the tenant for damages caused by the tenant's negligence. |
|
Luallin, et al. v. Koehler, et al.
2002 ND 80
Highlight: The requirements for registration of securities and dealers under the North Dakota Securities Act apply only to securities which are sold or offered for sale in this state and only to dealers or agents who offer for sale or sell any securities within or from this state. |
|
State v. Steiger
2002 ND 79
Highlight: When sufficiency of the evidence is challenged, the evidence is examined in the light most favorable to the verdict to see whether a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime were established beyond a reasonable doubt. |
|
Interest of J.R. and L.R. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2002 ND 78 Highlight: A child is deprived if clear and convincing evidence shows the child is without the proper parental care necessary for the child's physical, mental, or emotional health, or morals, and the deprivation is not due primarily to the lack of financial means of the child's parents or guardians. |
|
Whiteman v. State
2002 ND 77
Highlight: A defendant cannot be required to demonstrate how his appeal would have been successful in order to establish that he was prejudiced by his attorney's failure to pursue a requested appeal. |
|
Harger v. Harger
2002 ND 76
Highlight: When a motion seeking modification of a child support order is brought within one year after its entry, the movant has the burden of demonstrating a material change in circumstances and the burden of presenting sufficient evidence to justify modification under the child support guidelines. |
|
State v. Paul
2002 ND 75 Highlight: The trial court's judgment of conviction for the unauthorized use of a motor vehicle is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Wilson v. Velva Rental Housing, Inc.
2002 ND 74 Highlight: Summary judgment dismissing contract claim is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6). |
|
State v. Disbrow
2002 ND 73 Highlight: The defendant's conviction on multiple counts of gross sexual imposition is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1). |
|
Peters-Riemers v. Riemers (See Docket Memo)
2002 ND 72
Highlight: When the state constitution was adopted in 1889 there was no common law or statutory right to a jury trial in divorce actions, and, therefore, N.D. Const. art. I, sec. 13 does not provide a right to a jury trial in divorce actions. |
|
State v. Norby
2002 ND 71 Highlight: Defenses or objections based on defects in the institution of a prosecution or on defects in the criminal complaint must be raised prior to trial, unless the complaint failed to charge an offense or the district court did not have jurisdiction. |
|
Negaard v. Negaard (cross-ref. w/20030174)
2002 ND 70
Highlight: A move sought in good faith and to gain legitimate advantages for the custodial parent and the child must not be denied simply because visitation cannot continue in the existing pattern. |
|
Berg v. Berg
2002 ND 69
Highlight: There is a presumption only supervised visitation will be allowed a noncustodial parent who has committed domestic violence, and to award unsupervised visitation the court must enter specific findings showing there is clear and convincing evidence the presumption has been rebutted. |
|
Knutson, et al. v. The County of Barnes, et al.
2002 ND 68 Highlight: Failure to present a claim against the state to the office of management and budget within one hundred and eighty days requires dismissal of a subsequent action. Summary judgment is appropriate when a party fails to plead the necessary elements to satisfy the statutory RICO requirements. |
|
Marschner v. Marschner (cross-ref. w/20000172)
2002 ND 67 Highlight: The burden is on the complaining party to demonstrate a trial court's findings of fact are clearly erroneous. |
|
DesLauriers v. DesLauriers
2002 ND 66
Highlight: The deliberate infliction of mental anguish upon one parent and the children by the other parent is relevant to the custody determination and may be considered by the trial court. |
|
Olander Contracting v. Gail Wachter Investments, et al.
2002 ND 65
Highlight: Indemnification is a remedy allowing a party to recover reimbursement from another for the discharge of a liability that, as between them, should have been discharged by the other. |
|
Isaak v. Sprynczynatyk
2002 ND 64
Highlight: A driving record is a regularly kept record, and establishes prima facie its contents. |
|
Western National Mutual Ins. Co. v. UND
2002 ND 63
Highlight: N.D.C.C. 26.1-32-01 and 26.1-32-03 codify the efficient proximate cause doctrine for determining insurance coverage for property damage where an excluded peril and a covered peril contribute to the damage. |
|
State v. Knowels (cross-ref. w/20030093)
2002 ND 62
Highlight: Failure to register as a sex offender is not a strict liability offense but, instead, includes the culpable mental state of "willfully." |
|
Olson, et al. v. Bismarck Parks and Recreation District
2002 ND 61 Highlight: The recreational use immunity statutes do not violate the state equal protection clause when applied to winter sledders injured on a hill owned, operated, and maintained by a public landowner. |
|
Anderson, et al. v. Heinze
2002 ND 60
Highlight: No counterclaim can be interposed in an eviction action, except as a setoff to a demand for damages or for rents and profits. |
|
Klagues, et al. v. Maintenance Engineering
2002 ND 59
Highlight: The class-action "joint and common interest" generally exists if one class member's failure to collect would increase the recovery of the remaining members, or if the defendant's total liability does not depend on how the recovery of the claim is distributed among the class members. A joint and common interest is not the same as a common question of law or fact. |
|
Wolfe v. Wolfe
2002 ND 58 Highlight: Permanent disorderly conduct restraining order is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Vincent (Cross-Ref. w/19980185)
2002 ND 57 Highlight: Conviction of gross sexual imposition is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5) and (7). |
|
State v. Radcliffe
2002 ND 56 Highlight: Judgment of conviction for gross sexual imposition is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
BTA Oil Producers, et al. v. MDU Resources Group, et al.
2002 ND 55
Highlight: When an impoverishment results from a valid contractual arrangement made by a party, the result is not contrary to equity and there has been no unjust enrichment. |
|
Petition to Change Resident Chambers from Watford City to Minot
2002 ND 54 Highlight: Judgeship transferred from Watford City to Minot. |
|
Kelsh v. Jaeger
2002 ND 53
Highlight: The Legislature can truncate senate terms when reasonably necessary to accomplish a constitutional mandate or directive. |
|
Froistad v. State
2002 ND 52
Highlight: A defendant's oral statement may be treated as a motion to withdraw a guilty plea. |
|
Wagaman v. Burke
2002 ND 51 Highlight: An order changing summer custody into summer visitation is an order establishing custody for purposes of the two-year restriction on motions to change custody. |
|
Interest of J.D. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2002 ND 50
Highlight: The statute requires evidence that less restrictive conditions were considered to affirm a district court's commitment order as the least restrictive course of treatment appropriate for an individual. |
|
Peters-Riemers v. Riemers (See Docket Memo)
2002 ND 49
Highlight: An eviction action may be brought to enforce the terms of a divorce judgment. |
|
City of Grand Forks v. Thong
2002 ND 48
Highlight: The legislature set twenty-eight days as the time a defendant in municipal court has to request a trial by jury. |
|
Dufner v. Dufner
2002 ND 47
Highlight: If the evidence establishes one of the grounds for divorce, it is not necessary for the court to make findings on other available grounds. |
|
Dalan v. Paracelsus Healthcare Corp.
2002 ND 46
Highlight: When a party fails to establish the existence of a factual dispute on an essential element of his claim, on which he will bear the burden of proof at trial, summary judgment is appropriate. |
|
Opp v. Ward Co. Social Services Bd., et al.
2002 ND 45 Highlight: Assets are actually available for Medicaid eligibility purposes when the applicant has a legal interest in a liquidated sum and has the ability through reasonable legal means to attempt to make the sum available for support. |
|
Henderson v. Director, N.D. Dept. of Trans.
2002 ND 44
Highlight: The Supreme Court exercises a limited review in appeals involving drivers' license suspensions or revocations. |
|
State v. Schmidt
2002 ND 43 Highlight: Absent an offer of proof to support the claim, a trial court does not err in denying a motion in limine for a jury instruction on an affirmative defense of innocent mistake of fact. |
|
Wahl v. Country Mutual Ins. Co., et al.
2002 ND 42
Highlight: The statutory requirement that an insurer give at least ten days notice of cancellation of a commercial insurance policy during the term of the policy does not require an insurer to provide notice of cancellation when the policy term expires. |
|
State v. Morrison
2002 ND 41 Highlight: Judgment of conviction for assaulting a police officer is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
State v. Aipperspach
2002 ND 40 Highlight: Denial of motion to suppress and judgment of conviction for abuse of child in violation of N.D.C.C. 14-09-22 summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Dennison v. N.D. Dept. of Human Serv.
2002 ND 39
Highlight: The State's recorded homestead statement for old age assistance benefits under N.D.R.C. 50-0707 (1943) affects the right or interest of the State in land in North Dakota under the exception to the Marketable Record Title Act in N.D.C.C. 47-19.1-11(2). |
|
Gruebele, et al. v. Geringer
2002 ND 38 Highlight: A claimant's action to quiet title based on adverse possession will fail when the claimant is unable to prove hostile, exclusive, and continuous possession for the statutorily required time. |
|
Kelly v. Kelly
2002 ND 37
Highlight: An order changing custody is a finding of fact, which will not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly erroneous. |
|
State v. Hirschkorn
2002 ND 36
Highlight: Because of the importance of an accused's confrontation rights, the safeguards built into N.D.R.Ev. 803(24), allowing admission in evidence of a child's hearsay statements about sexual abuse, must be strictly observed. |
|
Zeller v. Zeller
2002 ND 35
Highlight: When the relevant factors for consideration in determining a motion to change the residence of a child to another state weigh in favor of the custodial parent's request to relocate the child, the trial court's denial of the motion is reversible error. |
|
City of Jamestown v. Jerome
2002 ND 34
Highlight: A police officer is not fulfilling a community caretaking function when approaching a person under circumstances where it is obvious the person is neither in need of nor desires assistance. |
|
Estate of Howser
2002 ND 33
Highlight: Whether undue influence exists is a question of fact. |
|
Bertsch, et al. v. Duemeland, et al. (cross-ref. w/20040055)
2002 ND 32
Highlight: Whether a communication that is capable of a defamatory meaning is understood by the recipient as defamatory is ordinarily a question of fact. |
|
City of Devils Lake v. Lawrence
2002 ND 31 Highlight: An officer's reasonable and articulable suspicion that an individual has committed the offense of disorderly conduct is sufficient to justify a temporary detention of that individual for investigative purposes. |
|
Olson v. Olson
2002 ND 30 |
|
Knutson v. Knutson
2002 ND 29
Highlight: In considering whether a settlement agreement between divorcing parties should be enforced, the trial court should inquire: (1) whether the agreement is free from mistake, duress, menace, fraud, or undue influence; and (2) whether the agreement is unconscionable. |
|
Hughes v. State, et al. (Con. w/20010189 & 20010190)
2002 ND 28
Highlight: Issues raised in the district court but not briefed on appeal are waived. |
|
Red Paint v. State
2002 ND 27
Highlight: A post-conviction relief claim of disclosure of privileged communications is barred by res judicata if it was fully and finally determined in a previous proceeding. |
|
City of Fargo v. Steffan (Consolidated w/20010176)
2002 ND 26
Highlight: The arrest of a person in a public place for a public offense committed in the officer's presence is neither a violation of the United States' nor North Dakota's Constitution. |
|
Grosinger v. M.B.K. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2002 ND 25 Highlight: The phrase "likely to engage in further acts of sexually predatory conduct," used for commitment of sexually dangerous persons, means the person's propensity towards sexual violence is of such a degree as to pose a threat to others. |
|
State v. Roberson
2002 ND 24 Highlight: While a defendant's disruptive conduct in court may, in some instances, be sufficient grounds to require a competency hearing, not all disruptive defendants are incompetent to stand trial. Rather, the conduct may be contempt of court. |
|
Buchholz v. ND Department of Transportation
2002 ND 23 Highlight: A test operator scrupulously complies with the State Toxicologist's approved method to conduct a breath test if the test operator observes that the subject had nothing to eat, drink, or smoke in the twenty minutes prior to the collection of a breath sample. |
|
Ghorbanni v. ND Council on the Arts, et al.
2002 ND 22
Highlight: Presenting a claim letter to an assistant attorney general does not satisfy N.D.C.C. 32-12.2-04(1), which requires that notice of a claim against the State be presented to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. |
|
Piatz v. ND Dept. of Transportation
2002 ND 20 Highlight: Judgment of the district court affirming the decision of the Department of Transportation suspending driver's license for driving under the influence is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5). |
|
State v. Guy
2002 ND 19 Highlight: Conviction of gross sexual imposition, burglary, robbery, and felonious restraint is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7). |
|
Burke v. State
2002 ND 18 Highlight: Judgment denying an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1) and (2). |
|
State v. Ringsrud
2002 ND 17 Highlight: Judgment of conviction for unlawful possession of drug paraphernalia is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1), (3). |
|
State v. Randall
2002 ND 16
Highlight: Under N.D.R.Ev. 609 (a)(i), the burden is on the State to point to a danger of prejudice that substantially outweighs the probative value of prior convictions offered by a defendant in a criminal case to impeach a witness for the State. |
|
Judicial Conduct Commission v. Tessmann
2002 ND 15 Highlight: Former municipal judge censured for violation of N.D. Code Jud. Conduct Canon 2, and prohibited from serving as a judge. |
|
State v. Perreault
2002 ND 14
Highlight: A motion to dismiss tests the sufficiency of the information, but does not serve as a device for summary trial of the evidence. |
|
Bender v. Aviko USA L.L.C.
2002 ND 13 Highlight: In opposing a summary judgment motion, a party may not simply rely on unsupported and conclusory allegations or denials in the pleadings, but must, instead, set forth specific facts illustrating the existence of a genuine issue for trial. |
|
Judicial Vacancy in the Northwest District
2002 ND 12 Highlight: Judgeship ordered retained in Minot. |
|
State v. BlackCloud
2002 ND 11 Highlight: Trial court's order revoking probation is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
St. Claire v. State
2002 ND 10 Highlight: A trial court may summarily dismiss an application for post-conviction relief if there is no genuine issue of fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Crary
2002 ND 9 Highlight: A lawyer may not draft a will that includes a substantial testamentary gift to the lawyer or the lawyer's parent, child, sibling, or spouse, unless the client is related to the beneficiary. Disbarment orderd. |
|
City of Fargo v. Tipler
2002 ND 8 Highlight: Juries do not have a right to decide a case contrary to law or fact, but instead, must accept the law from the trial court and apply the law to the facts. |
|
Interest of J.S. (CONFIDENTIAL) (see Docket Memo)
2002 ND 7
Highlight: Before a court may order the extension of a continuing-treatment order it must find the patient is mentally ill, and there is a reasonable expectation that, if not treated, there exists a serious risk of harm to the patient, others, or property. |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Swanson (CON. W/20010161)(CROSS-REF W/990357-990358)
2002 ND 6 Highlight: Disbarment is an appropriate sanction when an attorney violates numerous rules of professional conduct involving a lack of diligence, and the attorney has a prior disciplinary history involving similar conduct. |
|
State v. Palmer (CONSOLIDATED W/20010124,20010125,& 20010126)
2002 ND 5
Highlight: To establish a failure to comply with the statutory process for drawing a jury, the complaining party must provide a factual basis showing the process was prejudicial, actually excluded, systematically excluded, or statistically excluded a fair cross section of the population. |
|
State v. Weaver
2002 ND 4
Highlight: In reviewing a trial court's denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal, the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution and the appellate court determines only whether there is evidence which could have allowed the jury to draw an inference reasonably tending to prove guilt and fairly warranting a conviction. |
|
State v. Marshall (Consolidated w/20010253)
2002 ND 3 Highlight: Denials of N.D.R.Crim.P. 35(a) motion for correction of sentence and N.D.R.Crim.P. 36 motion for correction of a clerical mistake in sentence are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1). |
|
Terry v. Terry
2002 ND 2
Highlight: A party seeking to set aside a judgment based upon a stipulation must show that, under the law of contracts, there is justification for setting aside the stipulation. |
|
Jaskoviak v. Gruver, et al.
2002 ND 1
Highlight: Evidence submitted with a motion for reconsideration after summary judgment has been granted is untimely. |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Boulger
2001 ND 210 Highlight: A lawyer commits an ethical violation when the lawyer drafts a will for an unrelated client giving the lawyer a contingent bequest of a substantial gift. |
|
Consolidated Telephone v. Western Wireless Corporation, et al.
2001 ND 209
Highlight: Unless the Federal Communications Commission's rulings and regulations have been appropriately challenged in the proper federal forum, a state court is not at liberty to review the FCC's statutory interpretation even if its soundness is doubted, and the state court must apply the rulings and regulations as written. |
|
Dimond v. State Board of Higher Education (Consolidated w/20010155)
2001 ND 208 Highlight: A breach of contract action against the State is governed by the three-year statute of limitations in N.D.C.C. 28-01-22.1. |
|
Gepner, et al. v. Fujicolor Processing, Inc., et al.
2001 ND 207
Highlight: N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) is to be liberally construed and applied, and trial courts should be more lenient in granting motions to vacate default judgments than in vacating judgments in cases which have been tried on their merits. |
|
Belgarde, et al. v. Askim, et al.
2001 ND 206 Highlight: Before dismissing a cause of action to sanction a party for destruction of evidence, the trial court must consider the culpability of the party against whom sanctions are being imposed, the prejudice to the party moving for sanctions, and the availability of less severe alternative sanctions. |
|
Interest of M.C.H. (CONFIDENTIAL) (CROSS-REF. W/20010132)
2001 ND 205 Highlight: Juveniles between the ages of seven and fourteen have no common law right to a presumption of incapacity to commit a crime, because the criminal capacity of children between the ages of seven and fourteen has been declared by statute. |
|
City of Fargo v. Roberson (see Docket Memo)
2001 ND 204 Highlight: The Supreme Court will not consider questions that were not presented to the trial court and are raised for the first time on appeal. |
|
Interest of D.P. (Confidential)
2001 ND 203 Highlight: For hospitalization in a mental health case, the district court must find by clear and convincing evidence that alternative treatment is not adequate or hospitalization is the least restrictive alternative. |
|
State v. Baumgartner
2001 ND 202
Highlight: One cannot be an accomplice without having the requisite criminal intent for the underlying offense, even if he or she is a co-conspirator. |
|
State v. Barth (Consolidated w/20010110)
2001 ND 201
Highlight: A trial court has broad discretion in selecting a method to impanel a jury, if it permits the defendant to exercise peremptory challenges without embarrassment and does not intimidate him from exercising them. |